zoidsfandomcom-20200224-history
Zoids Wiki:Archives/Forum:Releases
=Overhaul= The releases sections NEED to be cleaned up. I have gone through and read them, re-read them, read the pages, re-read the pages, and I have no idea which Zoid was released when, how many times, or even if the info that is there is correct! Basically, while the anime sections have had major overhauls since this wiki was made, the model sections have not. They are relatively orphaned, and, most importantly, are so vague that they are basically what I'd term to be "elitist". By that I mean that only the people who know what they are talking about beforehand will be able to edit them, and these people have no incentive to edit, nor can they be held to account if they actually do change the info. Essentially, what I'm saying is that if you knew everything there was to know about Zoids, but didn't have any info about the online community, there's no way you'd end up with release sections like the ones we have now. They have no consistency, the geographical regions are random, the timelines are useless and the sets are bundled in a scattered and inconsistent manner. Right now, I see it as an attempted mismash of zoid.us and Phenotypes' styles, with the end result being a horrible mess. Of course, this is not a short-run project. I therefore do not care in the slightest about some knee-jerk reaction that is thought up after reading this post. Go read the pages in question (if you can find them!), go think up alternatives, and come up with answers for the following questions before replying: *1- What is your preferred system of providing info about Zoids releases (and why)? *2- In the above system, is it legible (and navigable) to someone not versed in Zoids? *3- In the above system, can any Zoid be easily sorted into groups? *4- In the above system, is the information that can be put into the release page reliable and fact-based (and why)? *5- Is that system an exhaustive list (ie: covers ALL releases of every Zoid)? The answers to those questions, as I see them, for the current system, are as follows: *2- No, I cannot navigate the current system. For instance, I have no idea where to look for information about the Fuzors release. It being filed under "NJR" makes no sense to someone who doesn't already know the information (and these are exactly the people we don't care about- wikis are for the uninformed, not the "know-it-all"s). *3- No, the Pacific release is basically an errant, random category that exists only when someone tries to retrofit information into the current system. It makes no sense to group Zoids into a category that doesn't exist on the wiki. *4- No, the release information switches between Zoid types, geographical regions and time-based approaches so much that it is nigh impossible to get any reliable information out of the pages. *5- Yes. Every Zoid is covered somewhere. Problem is finding it. Good luck with that. I have a few possible solutions, but I want to hear what other people say before offering them, lest I bias the results. Ok, now that that's all said, I want to state one last thing. Don't get bogged down in counterarguments. Chances are, I've already considered them. Telling me why the system should not be changed is very unlikely to serve any useful purpose. I know there are reasons to keep the old system, and I am willing to keep the old system. However, there is no point keeping it if a better system can be constructed. this should be the focus of replies to this topic. Right. Long, but necessary. Please discuss. Note again that I have no intention of implementing any proposed change in the short term. Slax01 03:40, August 1, 2010 (UTC) =Replies= imo Fuzors and Genesis being under NJR is confusing. I've never liked sorting them that way, because a newbie is gonna see "Fuzors" on the box and look for Fuzors...that and they don't even go with the NJR story-wise. I'm not quite sure how best to divide things or what to do with the NPR (as the NPR is kind of a...nightmare mishmash of other releases when it comes to organization). Perhaps just dividing things by era year-wise would be better (ie, 1983-1990 would cover all the OJR/OER/OAR stuff), and then after that blob of release, by location? Though that gets more headache-inducing later. Ugh. Really, I think the biggest problem is figuring out some reliable TOP-level way of sorting things. If we can get a better way of doing that, the rest will come easier. Pointytilly 14:57, August 1, 2010 (UTC) I don't think the year thing would be effective, given that they were released in "waves". I do think that some of them need to be divided, given that this wiki has major conflicts with Wikipeida (a place that one would first go to for Zoid releated info). Now, we know we can't count on Wikipeida for Zoid info (need I give examples), but I did notice one thing. Fuzors and Genesis were seperate from the NJR line. Maybe splitting them up might not be a bad thing, though there will be a lack of info, given how short some of the lines ran, an the lack of knowledge that might accompny the . I'll look into this more, and see what can and can't be done. (Zoids Fanatic 15:13, August 1, 2010 (UTC)) Well that's enough time for people to sate their thoughts, so now I will state my thoughts: to sort them by the release date of each individual kit. After the date will be the kit's name. After the name a blurb that will say what the kit was and where it was released. Of course, every different kit will get a date, but so too will every (re)release of the same kit(s). If possible, practical, or needed, these dates can be grouped- but this may prove problematic if the groups overlap. In other words, get rid of the release sections altogether. I mean, if possible, we could simply get rid of the "List of Zoids" page and replace it with a sortable table. That way the list could be alternately be sorted by name or by release date- and it would look way better too. Yes, this would mean every single Zoids page's model section would have to be rewritten but that's kinda the point here. As for wikipedia, it is not a concern of mine. For me to correct wikipedia, I'd need a source of info first. If this wikia can become a reliable source of info, we will then have a platform from which we can fix wikipedia. Thus, I'm focusing on this wikia first. Can't fix the house without fixing the foundations. Slax01 11:20, August 9, 2010 (UTC) Here's an example of what I mean: I personally think this is a very easy system to implement, and attempting to fill in this table highlights the gross inadequacies of the current system. Ideally, this page would replace the "List of Zoids" page, depending on how well it works. Note also this table can be expanded to include non-model merchandise as well. Feedback appreciated. Slax01 23:53, August 13, 2010 (UTC) Works fine to me, though what about things with uncertain release dates—at the end in a Hell Knows/Unreleased group? There's always something to mess with sorting systems ;_;. (It's why I got partway through trying to design a reliable database structure for a model info database—as in, MySQL—and then threw my hands up in the air and gave up for the time being.) Pointytilly 19:52, August 14, 2010 (UTC) :While you could replace the List of Zoids page with a gigantic table, I think it would end up harder to navigate because of the sheer size of the table. However using them for the releases section on every page, followed by a gallery of each release, would clean that up a lot though.--Azimuth727 22:40, August 14, 2010 (UTC) @Tilly: if we don't know the date, we can put in placeholder text and so long as the text is uniform, it will still sort. Though yes, we do have to be careful- one extra spacebar and the thing could get out of whack. @Azimuth: I like that idea. Slax01 23:47, August 14, 2010 (UTC) Um, Azimuth, your idea kinda sounds a bit complcated, and may just be very hard to find any info. As for the table, it would just be to gigantic, and to much info that has to go here, there, everywheres. I mean, we want to help the viewers, not confuse them. (Zoids Fanatic 00:47, August 15, 2010 (UTC)) The table is a great idea! I like how you have a type and # designation section, cool stuff Slax. I wouldn't go with release date as the sorting mainly because we have several varients from different times per page. And a few Zoids have unknown release dates could become a trouble, and non-Tomy Zoids or non-model may be left in the cold (if we choose include those in the table, non-Tomy/non-model could even be a seperate table). Plus, I'm not sure how well visitors know the Zoids model release dates. I mean when I got into Zoids I had no idea Redler, Sheild Liger and Gojulas were released long before the NJR line, heck, I didn't even know there were Zoids released before 2001 for quite some time. You did say "the list could be alternately be sorted by name or by release date", I'd say sort by name (alphabetically) first. It's a common organization to start and we can easily include varients. If there is a conflict with name, go by line release next. For example Zaber Fang, you can have Sabre Tiger=OJR/NJR/HMM, Zaber Fang=NAR, Great Sabre=OJR/HMM, Zabre=OER and Saber=Zoids 2. When there are multiple releases under one name (like Sabre Tiger again) you could go by release date for order i.e. OJR Sabre Tiger first, NJR Sabre Tiger next and HMM Sabre Tiger last. Date or name, I'd still like to see the table replace the list of Zoids page up now.SharkWings 22:31, August 15, 2010 (UTC) If you click the buttons in the headings, they allow you to sort it by the content in that column. Here's what I'm thinking so far: *On each page, put a table like the one above. It will be (by default) sorted by release date. **Below this table, galleries of each Zoid can be placed with appropriate headings. These can be captioned or be placed with accompanying text (where appropriate) to make sure no data is lost. *The list of Zoids page will be replaced with a table like the one above, but with each Zoid only being mentioned once. The table will be (by default) sorted alphabetically, with the Zoid's article name being used (when appropriate). **The list of non-model Zoids will be merged into that page in a separate table. Probably the biggest point of contention will be this sentence though: That the above tables make no reference to things like "NJR" or "OER", so these pages should be deleted. Any info can be salvaged to the "Zoids" page and new pages can be created in the future (if appropriate) using a new, consistent, navigable naming convention. I personally don't believe that this needs to be done, but I don't have a complete knowledge of the releases, so my conclusions are not to be taken as final or absolute. The list of Zoids page will be reformatted when (if) I get the time, as this isn't a contentious issue. The rest I will take no action on until the appropriate level of feedback is achieved. Slax01 00:43, August 16, 2010 (UTC) :Replacing the list of Zoids with a sortable table would make it easier to navigate, however I don't see how each Zoid would only be mentioned once using the table above. Also, I don't think it would be necessary to delete the individual release pages (NJR, OJR, etc). Maybe delete the lists of Zoids on those pages... but I wouldn't do that either, as they list the names of the Zoids as they were released at that point, which is important. :I still like the idea of adding a table to every page, with a gallery of the releases below that, and then any extra info below that.--Azimuth727 03:35, August 16, 2010 (UTC) resolution I've been trying to get the List of Zoids page off the ground, and as far as I'm concerned, it's ready to go- but I want to put the Zoid's release details into the table. I cannot do this until the releases sections are cleaned up. As such, here's a template- all pages need to be made to conform with this template- though the template may (and probably should) be changed if there are problems with the one I've written (again, I have very little idea about releases, so I'm winging it). Oh, BTW- the "Zoids" page needs a cleanup too (some are missing). -but that requires the rest of the pages to be fixed first. Slax01 07:09, September 23, 2010 (UTC)